Konica Minolta SLR manual Conclusions, Acknowledgement, References

8 D. Bister et al. Features Section JO September 2006

19:17:41	Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003)
11/7/06	369598 -
Journal of Orthodontics JOR3338.3d	The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924

the UK are colour-deficient.6Slight variations in color, although occasionally important, are not absolutely paramount to taking good orthodontic records. The main aim was to test for ease of use and hence alteration of images was not allowed.

It was often difficult for the assessors to consistently identify the images and from this it was concluded that there was little difference between the cameras.

Quality of the viewfinder

Testing the quality of the viewfinder requires all cameras to be lined up and compared by holding two cameras simultaneously against right and left eye. To our knowledge, there is no other objective method to test this feature. Brighter and larger viewfinders allow easier focusing and handling, and it was surprising to see that size and brightness of the viewfinder did not necessarily correlate with the price of the camera.

Time needed to recharge the macro-flash

The fastest units were re-activated within a few seconds. Although 6–9 seconds does not appear to be a long time, to us, it is long enough to cause delay in workflow. The units were tested with previously unused, standard non- reusable AA batteries (Duracell), and flash-recharge times may vary when different batteries are used.

It should be noted that most macro-flash units were not particularly powerful and great care needed to be taken not to move too far from the patient for the extra- oral views, as underexposure may result.

Conclusions

It is very difficult to recommend a particular camera for dental photography. Each of the tested models was capable of taking adequate images. Some of the models were easier to use than others. Considerable experience is necessary to take adequate images for some cameras. However, once the initial camera-settings were adjusted, the user-friendliness of the Olympus E1 and Olympus E300 were similar to the benchmark ‘Yashica Dental Eye’. The change of settings was more complex for all other cameras: Canon, Konica-Minolta and Pentax cameras required aperture changes between intra- and extra-oral photography. The Nikon and Fujifilm models had to be manually re-set for aperture and flash between

intra- and extra-oral photography to produce best results.

The cameras, which were consistently ranked best for fidelity-fidelity, were among the most complex to use (Nikon D100 and Fujifilm S 3 Pro). For ideal color reproduction images of all manufacturers have to be adjusted, so this parameter is not to be the most important one when it comes to choosing a camera. Other factors, such as robustness, environmental sealing (water and dust protection—Olympus E1), weight, viewfinder qualities and ability to clean the sensor from dust at start-up, may all impact on the final decision- making process. Finally, there is a significant difference in price and this will undoubtedly play a role in the decision making process.

Models are being replaced at a rapid pace, and industry may eventually develop a digital SLR dedicated for dental use, which is easy to use with the standard settings, such as the ‘Yashica Dental Eye’.

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Campkins Camera Centre, Cambridge United Kingdom for their help and support for this study.

References

1.Bengel W. Dentale Fotografie. Berlin: Quintessence, 2001.

2.Sandler J, Murray A. Digital photography in orthodontics. J Orthod 2001; 28: 197–201.

3.Doldo T, Fiorelli G, Patane B. A comparison of three digital cameras for intra-oral photography. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33: 588–93.

4.Eliades T, Kakaboura A, Eliades G, Bradley TG. Enamel color alterations associated with orthodontics. In: Graber TM, Eliades T, Athanasiou AE (Eds) Risk Management in Orthodontics: experts’ guide to malpractice. Berlin: Quintessence Publishing, 2004; 11–18.

5.International Color Consortium. White paper #17. Available at: http://www.color.org/ICC_white_paper_17_ ICC_profiles_with_camera_images.pdf (accessed 30th May 2006).

6.Cumberland P, Rahi JS, Peckham CS. Impact of congenital color vision deficiency on education and unintentional injuries: findings from the 1958 British birth cohort. BMJ 2004; 329: 1074–5.